Status of the Boost.Property_tree library

[Max-128]

What is the status of the Boost.Property_tree library?  I notice it is now in the SVN trunk.   Does this mean it will be part of the next release?

<https://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/trunk/boost/property_tree/>

Thanks,
Max

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[Paul Baxter]

> What is the status of the Boost.Property_tree library?  I notice it is now
> in the SVN trunk.   Does this mean it will be part of the next release?
>
> <https://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/trunk/boost/property_tree/>

I really like the simplicity of this library but this is about the third or
fourth request in the last few months without a reply.

This is not a slight on the original author or this library, but it does
bring up the more general question..

Does boost really want to put an 'unsupported' new library into a release?

I'd suggest the release manager consider leaving such libraries in the
sandbox if they haven't got a commitment from an individual and they haven't
yet been incorporated in a release. A first release is likely to shake down
a library more than the review process and it is at this point the author or
perhaps a maintainer is valuable. Indeed many libraries change radically
enough after the review that they often benefit tremendously from the
shakedown that first release gives them.

Perhaps new libs need a named sponsor as an entry criterion for
incorporation?

I also appreciate that the current monolithic boost release cycle can be
difficult for new library authors to make a commitment to in advance. Hence
the sponsor may not necessarily be the author.


Once 'in', inevitably some maintainers will move on. I am grateful for their
efforts and the library will then sink or swim on its merits. The issue of
what to do or document for such libraries is not one I intended to cover in
this email.

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[Sebastian Redl]

Paul Baxter wrote:
>> What is the status of the Boost.Property_tree library?  I notice it is now
>> in the SVN trunk.   Does this mean it will be part of the next release?
>>
>> <https://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/trunk/boost/property_tree/>
>>    
>
> I really like the simplicity of this library but this is about the third or
> fourth request in the last few months without a reply.
>  
If the library is really unsupported, I'd be willing to take over
support. I think it's an extremely valuable library for quickly writing
a configuration interface.

Sebastian
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[Johan Råde]

Sebastian Redl wrote:

> Paul Baxter wrote:
>>> What is the status of the Boost.Property_tree library?  I notice it is now
>>> in the SVN trunk.   Does this mean it will be part of the next release?
>>>
>>> <https://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/trunk/boost/property_tree/>
>>>    
>> I really like the simplicity of this library but this is about the third or
>> fourth request in the last few months without a reply.
>>  
> If the library is really unsupported, I'd be willing to take over
> support. I think it's an extremely valuable library for quickly writing
> a configuration interface.
>
> Sebastian
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>

The property tree library is a very useful library.
At my work, we use it a lot.
We have also built some extensions to it,
that lets you put (possible nested) STL containers
and tuples in a property tree,
using the tree structure of the property tree.

If the original author has abandoned the library,
then it would be great if Sebastian would take over.

--Johan Råde

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[Darryl Green-3]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces@...
[mailto:boost-bounces@...]
> On Behalf Of Paul Baxter
>
> > What is the status of the Boost.Property_tree library?  I notice it
is
> now
> > in the SVN trunk.   Does this mean it will be part of the next
release?
> >
> > <https://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/trunk/boost/property_tree/>
>
> I really like the simplicity of this library but this is about the
third
> or
> fourth request in the last few months without a reply.
>
> This is not a slight on the original author or this library, but it
does
> bring up the more general question..
>
> Does boost really want to put an 'unsupported' new library into a
release?
>

Yes - if it has adequate tests and they pass? If the library is failing
tests or has a significant number of bug reports that have not been
addressed it should not be included in the release. Given the current
branching scheme as I understand it this should not be a significant
problem and should not require the library to be "relegated" to the
sandbox.

There are obviously a range of possible risks here - a library
containing a lot of template metaprogrammming and associated compiler
dependent quirks/workarounds is, in general, more likely to:

1) Have latent bugs dependent on usage (as well as compiler)
2) Exhibit new/changed behaviour with new compiler releases

The former of these should result in bug reports. The second should be
found in automated testing.

In any case, I don't believe Property_tree falls into this category and
would seem to be a library that "anyone" could step up to the plate and
elect to maintain. I would also hope that it would be a library that
could be maintained relatively easily with the assistance of the broader
boost community - ie. user submitted patches. With trac etc. in place
this process should be more effective than it has been in the past.

I should note in the particular case of Property_tree, I am a
(new/recent) user. It works for me, if it didn't you would have a trac
bug submission (with test and patch)... Of course with no maintainer,
that might not be much help.

##########################################################################
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: Please consider our environment before printing this
email.This email and any attachments are confidential and may be subject to
copyright, legal or some other professional privilege. They are intended
solely for the attention and use of the named addressee(s). They may only
be copied, distributed or disclosed with the consent of the copyright owner.
If you have received this email by mistake or by breach of the
confidentiality clause, please notify the sender immediately by return
email and delete or destroy all copies of the email. Any confidentiality,
privilege or copyright is not waived or lost because this email has been
sent to you by mistake.

##########################################################################

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[Darryl Green-4]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces@... [mailto:boost-bounces@...]
> On Behalf Of Darryl Green

> ##########################################################################
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: Please consider our environment before printing this
> email.This email and any attachments are confidential and may be subject
> to
> copyright, legal or some other professional privilege....

Sorry - work have made some email improvements it seems. Last post from
there. I hereby release the above email into the public domain. Anything
expressed in that email is my own opinion and not that of my employer etc
etc....






_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[David Abrahams]

on Tue Mar 11 2008, "Paul Baxter" <pauljbaxter-AT-hotmail.com> wrote:

>> What is the status of the Boost.Property_tree library?  I notice it is now
>> in the SVN trunk.   Does this mean it will be part of the next release?
>>
>> <https://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/trunk/boost/property_tree/>
>
> I really like the simplicity of this library but this is about the third or
> fourth request in the last few months without a reply.
>
> This is not a slight on the original author or this library, but it does
> bring up the more general question..
>
> Does boost really want to put an 'unsupported' new library into a release?

No.

> I'd suggest the release manager consider leaving such libraries in the
> sandbox if they haven't got a commitment from an individual and they
> haven't yet been incorporated in a release.

Agreed.  In the past we've always assumed that the library author is
prepared to support it.  Usually that's been a safe assumption, but not
always.  

> A first release is likely to shake down a library more than the review
> process and it is at this point the author or perhaps a maintainer is
> valuable. Indeed many libraries change radically enough after the
> review that they often benefit tremendously from the shakedown that
> first release gives them.
>
> Perhaps new libs need a named sponsor as an entry criterion for
> incorporation?

In fact, I don't think we should bother accepting review requests
without a commitment from someone to support the code should it be
accepted.  Naming a responsible support party should be part of the
review request requirements.

--
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
http://boost-consulting.com

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[David Abrahams]

on Tue Mar 11 2008, Sebastian Redl <sebastian.redl-AT-getdesigned.at> wrote:

> Paul Baxter wrote:
>>> What is the status of the Boost.Property_tree library?  I notice it is now
>>> in the SVN trunk.   Does this mean it will be part of the next release?
>>>
>>> <https://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/trunk/boost/property_tree/>
>>>    
>>
>> I really like the simplicity of this library but this is about the third or
>> fourth request in the last few months without a reply.
>>  
> If the library is really unsupported, I'd be willing to take over
> support. I think it's an extremely valuable library for quickly writing
> a configuration interface.

Sebastian, thanks for the offer!  Could you contact Marcin Kalicinski
<kalita-AT-poczta.onet.pl> about this issue?

Note that, considering
https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/browser/trunk/libs/property_tree/index.html,
we can't afford to release this in 1.35

--
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
http://boost-consulting.com

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[David Abrahams]

on Tue Mar 11 2008, "Darryl Green" <Darryl.Green-AT-maxgaming.com.au> wrote:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: boost-bounces@...
> [mailto:boost-bounces@...]
>> On Behalf Of Paul Baxter
>>
>> > What is the status of the Boost.Property_tree library?  I notice it
> is
>> now
>> > in the SVN trunk.   Does this mean it will be part of the next
> release?
>> >
>> > <https://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/trunk/boost/property_tree/>
>>
>> I really like the simplicity of this library but this is about the
> third
>> or
>> fourth request in the last few months without a reply.
>>
>> This is not a slight on the original author or this library, but it
> does
>> bring up the more general question..
>>
>> Does boost really want to put an 'unsupported' new library into a
> release?
>>
>
> Yes - if it has adequate tests and they pass?

Not without documentation.  See
https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/browser/trunk/libs/property_tree/index.html
That's an "over-my-dead-body" issue for me.

--
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
http://boost-consulting.com

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[Stjepan Rajko-3]

On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 10:34 AM, David Abrahams
<dave@...> wrote:
>
>  Not without documentation.  See
>  https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/browser/trunk/libs/property_tree/index.html
>  That's an "over-my-dead-body" issue for me.
>

This might not have bearing on whether property_tree gets released,
but there are some docs at:
http://kaalus.atspace.com/ptree/doc/index.html

Although, these docs seem a little outdated - at times I've noticed
slight discrepancies between the docs and the code in trunk.

I've found this to be a very useful little library, too bad it doesn't
seem to be supported.

Stjepan
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[Darryl Green-4]

On Wed, 2008-03-12 at 13:34 -0400, David Abrahams wrote:
> on Tue Mar 11 2008, "Darryl Green" <Darryl.Green-AT-maxgaming.com.au> wrote:
> Not without documentation.  See
> https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/browser/trunk/libs/property_tree/index.html
> That's an "over-my-dead-body" issue for me.

True. There are docs in the sandbox version
https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/browser/sandbox/libs/property_tree/index.html

which links to
https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/browser/sandbox/libs/property_tree/doc/index.html

However, I take your point - the library is not release ready and needs
at least some "housekeeping" done. Thanks to Sebastian Redl for offering
to take on maintenance. Hopefully not too much work to do to get it
release ready (post 1.35).

My point remains that I don't think libs should be "relegated" from
trunk because they are not release ready. The development guidelines
docs don't seem to require this. A loss of release ready status (eg due
to a new compiler/platform) can happen to any library, at any time, not
just in the case of a newly accepted lib. Code that is not release ready
should not be in the release branch, but trunk is another matter surely?

When I started to look at what it would take to get property tree
release ready I couldn't find any documentation on what a library
developer (or contributor) needs to do to get a lib included in the
tests? I don't have the faintest idea of how the regression test system
works. Are there some docs somewhere? Property_tree is in the release
branch. Despite this it is not in the test results. Unless there is some
mechanism that stops a library in this condition from being included in
the release proper this seems like a problem?

---
Darryl Green


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost